I actually posted a link to the meaning of the word "Machiavelian", which you seem to have a problem with.
You posted a link? You might want to hit the HTML sandbox and and check the definition of the term "link".
As for the term Machiavellian, the modern definition is nothing more than a continuation of the age old, and now PC slander of Machiavelli by people who were too lazy to read anything more than the Prince. It assumes that people/politicians and such that are "cunning and unprincipled" are somehow behaving as Machiavelli would have them behave. This is not true. Had you actually read the explanation I offered and considered it, you might have understood that.
As for Sun Tzu, he himself discusses the unversality of his military principals and there application in all adversarial relationship: military, political, personal. They are not all that different from many precepts of confucious. And on that note:
"A gentleman can see a question from all sides without bias. The small man is biased and can see a question only from one side." - Confucius, Analects, c.400 b.c.
Get back to me when you expanded your reading list. There is no point in arguing with you since you lack knowledge of the basic reference material I am using. And yes, I have read every single author I mentioned and many others as well. I encourage you to do the same.